Pat Hickey
Pat Hickey
We may not be able to accept this change before 0.3.0 - AFAIK, we are scaling back all of our subtyping aspirations to where just adding new functions to interfaces...
I guess in this repo we'll be working on 0.3.0-draft in parallel with 0.2.x-draft, so maybe landing #101 underneath a subdir (`0.3.0-draft/`?) and then we can keep iterating on both...
I believe we should change the version to be `0.2.1-draft` as part of this PR.
Yes, we should only change the version at the `wasi:http` package declaration in `proxy.wit`.
Agreed we should document this on `outgoing-body.write`! One way to implement this is for `check-write` to refuse readiness once the content-length has been reached, but this is difficult to debug...
When the written size is less than the content length, `HTTP-{request,response}-body-size(option)` is the correct variant to return throw from `outgoing-body.finish`. The outgoing-body will have to return the correct request/response variant...
Thanks - @elliottt can you work on fixing that?
This issue is complicated and I want to spend time figuring out what we can do to solve it, but I don't believe that we should make this addition to...
Just discussed this with @elliottt - In case 1, we don't want to change the meaning of flush to mean nothing. Instead, calling `flush` should make the body stream not...
I believe his argument is that `new-fields` should take a `list`, a design change I am also in favor of